The ZTE-NBN Deal: What now?

[ichor_82283]

---

The key to this whole he said she said situation is Neri...

He knows a lot about what happened pero gi gag order lang siya ni GMA (by invoking executive privilege).

To place the whole thing in perspective.... there are only 2 possibilities..... Abalos is lying... or Neri and JDVIII are lying...


If you question the credibility of the three just ask this one question to all 3 of them..
"Why would he be lying?"

1. For abalos... he's just defending himself against any allegations of wrongdoing...
2. for JDV III.. he may just be a disgruntled businessman who lost the bid and is out to get payback.
3. For Neri.... he would lie because It really doesnt make sense why he would be lying... it's obvious he's protecting the president pero he knows his testimony against abalos would damage the Comelec Chairman and raise questions about GMA's credibility. It's like shooting urself in the foot...

Neri is not telling us what the president said after he reported the 200 bribe.


The breaks in this case can come from 2 ppl... (Abalos and Neri)...

1. If abalos in an attempt to clear his name suddenly becomes a star witness and brokers an immunity deal... its gonna be a tell all affair and he's gonna reveal everything about the Hello Garci and all the other issues.

2. If Neri is grilled enough and pressured so that he will think of his own welfare before the presidents. He might just spill the beans on his conversation with the president.


In this case... you have witnesses testifying.. both Neri and JDVIII give first hand testimonies of graft and corruption... yet with all witnesses.. the defense will always try to discredit the witness first to make his testimony null and void (ex. Drug use). In this case.. the evidence is there.. (testimonies, discrepancies in the approval of the project, whitewashing of the bidding and other procurement procedures) The problem here is that the people holding the evidence are in cahoots with the persons in Power.

I beg to disagree with your propositions and insights on the ZTE deal.

AS I clearly pointed out, I have doubts on the integrity of neri, abalos, and much more to JDV III. Wasn't I so clear to point out that I don't give my merits to neri's or any other else's claim on the ZTE deal? If you say that the perspective lies in choosing whom to believe- meaning who's testimony holds true, sorry I don't bite it. What made you so sure that neri's the key? or any other else who are involved in the ZTE deal? I am standing on the factual basis of this case. I want proof. I want evidences. I don't regard neri's, abalos' or JDV III's testimonies or allegations as admissible.

On the matter of executive privilege:

Neri might have invoked the said legal availment into two reasons (I am not saying definite reasons but possibilities):

1. For separating the issue AWAY from his personal work and life to avoid self-infringement and governmental infringement (meaning not covering GMA or the palace but the governmental interest) and I believe it is legal to do so. I don't think this is a scenario of shooting your own foot. However, I don't discount or disregard it as a possibilty. It might be. I think it is just the media and our perception that is cover-up on the GMA-ABALOS-ZTE deal and bribe.

2. Just like in the case of invoking the right for privacy- the IGGY ARROYO tactic.

The break on this case, is there a PROOF to show that there is irregularity on the ZTE deal.

It is always easy to point out irregularities and discrepancies on testimonies or allegations as that. IT is the PROOF that validates that something happens not just simple high rise or yell of "BACK-OFF!" that would turn the world upside down. To say that there is ZTE deal irregularity is not just a "show" of hurt feelings or pride, or disregarded business as in the case of JDV III, or a mere meeting in some place that is connected with the whole story.

If you say that we should incline to a "credible" testimony or at least closer to a credible story, then we are looking at a prism. Never knowing which side is the original. IF only we can have a mark- that is proof that an irregularity indeed happens on the ZTE deal then we can have a good start to prosecute whoever is doing wrong above the law.

As it is easy for JDV III to demonstrate the "BACK-OFF" drama, then it is as easy to disregard his allegations. With Neri's side of the story, let him bring forth PROOF and not just asserting someone else's testimony.

[ichor_82283]

I have laid down my red flags or indicators when is the time to believe that there is a ZTE deal irregulaity.

[jay_sn0w]

OT: uhmm...mga bros just try to get a broader prospective....


i think it should be pushed through...it would greatly benefit the country...IMAGINE all GOV'T orgs dont have to pay TELEPHONE BILLS OR INTERNET BILLS...sayang ang negosyo nu?...


best thing to do is go THROUGH WITH IT once all the parties have been cleared (whether guilty or innocent)




FROM WIKI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philipp...rk_controversy

Controversy on the need for the project

U.P. School of Economics study. Existing networks: PREGINET, etc. Responses of Globe and Smart

[vipvip68]

@ ichor_82283

What I understand from your post is that.....If there is doubt in the integrity of all 3 (abalos, jdvIII and neri) then there's no way to deduce anything from their testimonies as anything that comes out of their mouth is worthless.

However, Integrity aside.... if you analyze their statements logically... one contradicts the other.

It's like... person A said this happened... person B said this did not happen. Given these 2 conflicting statements... they cannot both be right... and they cannot both be wrong as well... its either... the event happened or not... there's no other scenario. (Did Abalos offer the 200 bribe.... it can only be yes or no... did Abalos offer 10m Bribe... again.. yes or no... did the FG say "back off"to JDV III .... yes or no... discrediting all of them does not change the notion that one is stating a fact... while the other is not. So there is truth in their testimonies whether you think they're credible or not.

The question here is to determine whos testimony is correct.

On Executive Privilege...

Neri himself admitted that he was instructed by Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita to invoke the privilege under Ms Arroyo’s Executive Order No. 464.

Later in Malacanang Ermita denied ordering Neri to invoke EO 464...

Again we see a discrepancy.... they cannot both be right... they cannot both be wrong.

As far as Neri's reason for invoking EO464... he was just doing what he was told.


The testimonies here clearly show that someone is telling the truth while the other is lying....

I'm confident there will be hard evidence to determine who the guilty party is. This is where Neri and Abalos will come in.

[elvishtattoo]

ni resign naman si abalos sa Comelec.
out of delicadeza...
about the nbn deal., binoang man na nga issue uy!
ga usik lang sa panahon ug tax sa mga tawo ang senado!
wala man jud na silay imbestigasyon nga nahuman kay sila mismo mag cge man ug away!
tsk-tsk...

pls ko sulti ni JDV III nga mag hikog nlang sya!
TARSIER! sama sa iyang papa!
mga hayop!

[baron]

Abalos resigned as Comelec Chairman which leaves the opposition at a dilemma. They don't know how to attack the administration again. At first, they were insinuating that the president is involved even if the circumstances clearly states that she is not in any way included in the controversy. If there's any line to track, it will just go to Abalos. So they attacked Abalos in the meantime.

When Abalos resigned, they called him a fall guy or a sacrificial lamb of the president which I very much doubt. If there are any sacrifices that Abalos made, it will always be for himself and not for other people. It's just that the opposition was caught off guard of the situation. They never thought Abalos will immediately resigned since they have not yet feasted upon the controversy in a very long time.

[FK]

At first, they were insinuating that the president is involved even if the circumstances clearly states that she is not in any way included in the controversy.

Indeed there is... after knowing of the bribe attempt? What did the palace do?

[adzskie]

pasikat lang yan!

[mango]

OT- Hello FK- WELCOME BACK.

I'll take your lead, FK. I would also LOVE to know what GMA did or said after Neri told her of Abalos' bribe attempt.

Cause that is the very essence of Neri's testimony and the silence is DEAFENING

[FK]

@mango

now they are scrapping the contract? why not before when the bribe attempt was made? oh... i can't really expect something right from this administration.